Facts of the case are that the appellant who was in the employment of the civil service as a teacher based at Chinyika Secondary School allegedly asked a pupil one Natasha to have a love relationship with him and also commented that her breasts were sexy. These events took place from beginning of first term 2012 to 3rd term of that same year. He was also said to have patted Natasha inappropriately on the cheeks, exchanged vulgar words with her on one occasion and also caused her to pick up papers in the school yard during lesson time. He was... More
The appellant was employed by the respondent as a teacher, and was based at Chinyika Secondary School, Goromonzi District, Mashonaland East Province. In October 2012, he was charged with misconduct, in terms of the Public Service Regulations Statutory Instrument 1 of 2000, paragraph 1, 7 and 24 of the First Schedule (the Regulations).
The factual particulars of the misconduct were that the appellant improperly associated with minors, who were pupils at the school where he was stationed. He made inappropriate remarks to Natasha Ngarura, a form 2 pupil, to the effect that she was beautiful and had sexy breasts. He... More
This is an application for review of the disciplinary proceedings conducted by the respondent’s Disciplinary Authority on 3 February 2015, which resulted in the applicant being found guilty of misconduct and being discharged from employment as a consequence thereof.
The background to the matter reveals protracted disciplinary litigation dating back to 2012. The applicant was employed by the respondent as a teacher, and was stationed at Chinyika Secondary School, in the Goromonzi District, Mashonaland East Province. In October 2012, he was charged with misconduct, in terms of the Public Service Regulations, Statutory Instrument 1 of 2000, paragraphs 1, 7 and... More
Ruziwa issued a determination. He ordered appellant (employer) to pay respondent (employee) outstanding
salaries, allowances and NSSA deductions. The employer then appealed to this Court in terms
of section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 hereafter called the Act. More
The appeal was noted as against a determination of the Designated Agent for the National Employment Council (NEC) for the Rural District Councils. The determination which was handed down on the 13th of January 2013, in its operative part directed the reinstatement of the now Respondent without loss of salary and benefits or in the alternative, payment of damages for loss of employment in lieu of reinstatement. The parties were to approach this court for quantification in the event of failure to agreeon suchdamages. The Appellant was also directed to pay to Respondents their outstanding salary arrears for February, 2022,... More
1.This is a composite application for condonation of the late filing of an application for leave to appeal and also for leave to appeal and extension of time within which to appeal. It is made in terms of rr 66 and 67 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2025.
2.The application was filed on 15 May 2025 and is opposed by both respondents. More
Appellant was in the employ of Respondent. Appellant was dismissed for allegedly participating in an unlawful job action after a hearing. The matter was referred to arbitration and the Arbitrator upheld the decision to dismiss the Appellant. Appellant is dissatisfied and has appealed to this Court. More
As its name suggests, the applicant is a diamond mining company, carrying out its mining activities in Zvishavane. Its registered offices are in Harare. More
The applicant herein seeks a declaratory order that: it overpaid withholding tax to the respondent from January 2007 to October 2008 in the total sum of US$215,878.65; it is therefore entitled to offset the withholding tax payable for 2009 and 2010 against that overpayment; and all withholding taxes due by it for 2009 and 2010 have been settled in full. The respondent denies that any such overpayment was made or that the applicant is entitled to any set-off against its liability for withholding tax. Both parties seek an order for costs on a higher scale. More
This was a civil appeal. The dispute was deceptive in its simplicity. In the court a quo the parties even went on a stated case. But it was a tricky matter of interpretation of a statute. We thank counsel for commendable research and able argument. More
This matter was argued before me on 25 October 2010. Counsel for both the applicant and the respondent undertook to furnish me with authorities for the arguments advanced on behalf of both litigants. Unhappily counsel did not act on their undertaking with the result that the authorities filed by counsel for the respondent was only availed on 11 November 2010. To date I have not received any from the applicant’s counsel and as a result this judgment will be prepared without the benefit of those authorities More
This is an appealagainst the whole judgment of the High Court dated 20 January 2020, dismissing an application to strike down s58 of the Income Tax Act [Chapter 23:06] for violating the right to equal protection of the law and the right to administrative justice as provided by ss 56 and 68 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, 2013. More
This judgment is in respect of two matters, HC 2128/21 and HC 2166/21. The two matters were heard together because the substance of their complaints is the same. Both matters were brought by way of application. HC 2128/21 was instituted as an urgent court application while HC 2166/21 was brought as an urgent chamber application. Both applications are opposed by some of the respondents. Opposing papers, answering affidavits and heads of argument were filed following a case management meeting with the parties’ representatives at which the dates for filing the papers were set by consent. More
This is a unanimous decision of the court. The applicant filed an urgent court application which was allocated to us on the 14th of June 2021. After perusing it, we set it down for hearing today at 2pm for the purpose of doing case management.
An hour before the hearing we were served with a notice of withdrawal of the application with a tender for wasted costs.
The respondents’ lawyers appeared for the hearing. However, the applicant’s lawyers did not appear even after we had directed them to appear through the Registrar’s office. The Registrar informed us that they said... More
The applicant filed an urgent court application seeking an order for the committal to prison of the first respondent, Luke Malaba for contempt of court. This was in view of a declarator issued by the High Court on the 15th of May 2021 which he is said to have violated. More
